GNU bug report logs - #75755
feature/igc: Missing IGC_CHECK_RES?

Previous Next

Full log

Message #41 received at 75755 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: gerd <at> gnu.org, eller.helmut <at> gmail.com, gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com,
 75755 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefankangas <at> gmail.com, acorallo <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75755: feature/igc: Missing IGC_CHECK_RES?
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 17:17:54 +0000

"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:34:56 +0000
>> From: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
>> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>, gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com, 75755 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, gerd <at> gnu.org, eller.helmut <at> gmail.com, acorallo <at> gnu.org
>>
>> "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>>
>> > IMO, the single use of this macro is not worth of the complications
>> > due to relying on an internal enumeration macro.  The single function
>> > which uses this is a testing tool, which on top of that warns in its
>> > doc string not to use it.  Introducing significant complexity and
>> > breakage potential into Emacs due to this is IMO a tail wagging the
>> > dog.
>>
>> I agree with this paragraph; it's not worth it, let's drop the code.
>>
>> > So I suggest that we define our own enumeration.  We could copy some
>>
>> Why?
>
> Because it's easy, and will still give us human-readable error
> messages.

How does defining an enum give us that?  Did you mean "our own switch
statement"?  If so, what's wrong with the one on the current branch?

Pip

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.